Property·Law and Government

Author: (French) Bastiat
Translator: Feng Shou
Publisher:
Publish Date: 2004-05-01
Features: Bastiat possessed a 19th-century optimistic mindset, standing at the gateway of a globalized era and the dawn of liberal victory. Today, after experiencing various utopias, we have lost this optimism. We know that rational persuasion cannot make people abandon their illusions and misconceptions, because those with fantasies and delusions are not necessarily ignorant of economics and law, but rather driven by desires for control and manipulation, believing themselves superior and capable of manipulating humanity. And these very points, Bastiat had already revealed to us long ago.
Excerpt: In the realm of economics, an action, a habit, a system, or a law may produce more than one effect, bringing a series of consequences. Some of these consequences are immediately visible—they appear right after the cause and are easily noticed. Others, however, take time to manifest and are often overlooked. If we can anticipate them, we are fortunate. The difference between a good economist and a bad one lies in this: a bad economist is limited to seeing only the visible consequences, while a good economist considers both the visible and the speculative ones. This difference is enormous. For in most cases, immediate consequences may seem favorable, while subsequent ones turn out to be disastrous, or vice versa. Thus, it often happens that bad economists pursue immediate benefits without regard for the enormous harms that follow, while good economists are willing to endure minor misfortunes in the present to achieve greater gains in the future.
Of course, the same phenomenon exists in the realms of health and morality. A habit that seems pleasant at the time often brings pain later, such as a reckless lifestyle, laziness, or wastefulness. If a person focuses only on one habit and becomes addicted to it, unable to break free, he does so not just out of innate cravings but also believes he has thought it through carefully. This demonstrates that humans must inevitably go through a painful process. When they are in infancy, they are in a state of ignorance and adjust their actions based on immediate consequences. As they grow older, they can only see these consequences. Only after a longer period do they realize that they must also consider other consequences. Two entirely different mentors teach people this truth: experience and foresight.
All the consequences of an action: if fire burns us, we will inevitably come to understand that fire burns. But I would still prefer to replace this harsh teacher with a gentler one—foresight. To do so, I will examine the various consequences of several economic phenomena and compare the visible with the invisible.
2. Demobilization of the Army
A country is much like a person. If a person wants to make himself comfortable, he must weigh whether the cost is worth it. For a country, security is the greatest happiness. If mobilizing one hundred thousand soldiers and spending one hundred million francs is necessary to achieve this security, then I have nothing to say. This is a pleasure bought at a tremendous cost.
Now, when I express my views on this matter, please do not misunderstand me. If a legislator proposes demobilizing one hundred thousand soldiers, it would reduce the tax burden on taxpayers by one hundred million francs. If someone reacts to this proposal by saying, "These one hundred thousand soldiers and this one hundred million francs are indispensable for maintaining our security. It is indeed a cost, but without paying it, France could fall into internal chaos or be invaded by foreign enemies," I do not wish to refute this view—such a perspective may be right or wrong depending on the circumstances. The real nonsense lies in saying that this cost itself embodies some benefit, because it can bring advantages to some people.